Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Today's Revelations from Clinton.com

Citing indications of wrongdoing and bad faith, a federal judge has overruled government objections by declaring that a conservative group is entitled to more details about how Hillary Clinton's private email account was integrated into the State Department record keeping system and why it was not searched in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.
. . .
"Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA cases," Lamberth wrote in his three-page order. The judge noted that State argues it had no legal duty to search Clinton's emails when Judicial Watch's request arrived because her emails were not in the agency's possession and control at that time. It was not until December 2014 that Clinton turned over a portion of her email archive to State at the agency's request.

Instapundit tried to give Ron Fournier the benefit of the doubt in his statement that there should be a high bar for indicting presidential candidates; but then he read the Justice Departments guidance to prosecutors, and asks where Ron was when Rick Perry was frivolously indicted.

The attorney for the government should commence or recommend Federal prosecution if he/she believes that the person’s conduct constitutes a Federal offense and that the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction ….

But wait, there’s more:

In determining whether to commence or recommend prosecution or take other action against a person, the attorney for the government should not be influenced by: The person’s race, religion, sex, national origin, or political association, activities or beliefs ….

So actually, declining to prosecute Hillary because she’s running for President would be an abuse of discretion. But follow the link to see the people who are trying to argue otherwise.